RE: WS-Addr issues

Dave wrote:
> Having one spot for Action will give all WS-A applications a much 
simpler
> processing model and enable a doc/literal world.

I agree that having a single location for the action/verb/operation would
definitely make things easier but my sense is that the push-back is coming
from the idea that in vanilla soap this location was in the Body itself
(for most, not all, cases) and just dup'd in other places like the HTTP
Action.  Looking at the list of older WS-* specs that have been developed 
I think is proof of that.  WSAddressing, through the mandated use of 
wsa:Action, has opened the door for that to change.  Newer specs, 
like WS-MDEX, have embraced wsa:Action's "I'm the operation" definition
to the point where if there are no parameters they don't even see the need
to put anything in the env:Body.  wsa:Action is no longer just an 
extension 
element but rather can be "the payload".  That's a pretty big change from 
the days when the HTTP Action URI seemed to be simply an optimization 
and/or
duplication of the first Body element.  If wsa:Action remains, and in
particular remains mandatory, I believe it should be viewed in the same
vein as the HTTP Action URI - an optimization, and in a lot of cases a
duplicate of what's in the first Body element, but _not_ a replacement for 
it.

If it does remain mandatory, then that should make Dave happy - one single
place to look (wsa:Action) and keep those who want to ignore it happy 
because
they still have the Body - just like vanilla soap.

If its optional, then I like Rich's idea of its absence being the 
equivalent
of the first Body element's NS+localPart.

-Doug